Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legend of Zelda (upcoming Wii game)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   snow delete, clear speculation.  Jamie ☆ S93  13:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Legend of Zelda (upcoming Wii game)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is a about an unreleased Zelda game, which currently does not seem to have enough information that isn't WP:OR, and thus is WP:CRYSTAL. Vivio Testa rossa  Talk 21:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete if nobody can prove the predictions contained therein. Alexius08 (talk) 23:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete until we have at least some reliable details about the game. Nicklegends (talk) 03:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - This is largely based on the rumour that a new Zelda game for the Wii will be revealed at this year's E3 event. Until that time, however, this has more rumours than a Fleetwood Mac album, so can thus be deleted. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) | (talk to me) | (What I've done)  09:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Crystalball.jpg   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 12:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 14:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Pre-emptive snowball delete as blatant speculation. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 15:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Smash Link with a ten pound hammer. MuZemike 16:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not even Pokémon HeartGold and SoulSilver has an article and it has had an actual announcement and alot of information released. I see no reason this should remain an article for annother year waiting for more information. --Blake (talk) 16:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Please note that the article's creator removed the AFD tag an lef a comment stating would you stop. you dont even know what your talking about I have readded the tag but based on the user's comment I srongly suspect that they are likely to do this again. I don't have time to keep a watching the article at so can someone please keep an eye on it.--70.24.180.177 (talk) 22:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Warned the user as such (see ). And you are right: AFD templates are not to be removed during AFD discussions. The user probably was not aware of that. MuZemike 23:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - The author does not cite any sources. Most of what is said is pure speculation and can not be verified. Iupolisci (talk) 03:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.